Skip to main content

Full text of "Two discussions : I. On spiritual direction, II. On leadership and authority"

See other formats


STUDIES 

in the Spirituality 

of Jesuits 




Two Discussions: 

I. On Spiritual Direction 

II. On Leadership and Authority 






Published by the American Assistancy Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality, 
especially lor American Jesuits working out their aggiornamento 

in the spirit of Vatican Council II 

Vol. IV March, 1972 No. 2 



THE AMERICAN ASSISTANCY SEMINAR ON JESUIT SPIRITUALITY 

consists of a group of Jesuits from various provinces who are listed below. 
The members were appointed by the Fathers Provincial of the United States 
in their meeting of October 3~9, 1968. The purpose of the Seminar is to 
study topics pertaining to the spiritual doctrine and practice of Jesuits, 
especially American Jesuits, and to communicate the results to the members 
of the Assistancy. The hope is that this will lead to further discussion 
among all American Jesuits — in private, or in small groups, or in commun- 
ity meetings. All this is done in the spirit of Vatican Council II 's rec- 
ommendation to religious institutes to recapture the original charismatic 
inspiration of their founders and to adapt it to the changed circumstances 
of modern times. The members of the Seminar welcome reactions or comments 
in regard to the topics they publish. 

To achieve these purposes, especially amid today's pluralistic cul- 
tures, the Seminar must focus its direct attention sharply, frankly, and 
specifically on the problems, interests, and opportunities of the Jesuits 
of the United States. However, many of these interests are common also 
to Jesuits of other regions, or to other priests, religious men or women, 
or lay men or women. Hence the studies of the Seminar, while meant es- 
pecially for American Jesuits, are not exclusively for them. Others who 
may find them helpful are cordially welcome to read them. 

THE MEMBERS OP THE SEMINAR ARE: 

William J. Burke, S.J., Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02167 

Thomas E. Clarke, S.J., Woodstock College, 475 Riverside Drive, New York, 
New York 1 0027 

James J. Doyle, S.J., Bellarmine School of Theology, 5430 University 
Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 6061 5 

John C. Putrell, S.J., School of Divinity, St. Louis University, 220 North 
Spring Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri 63108 

George E. Ganss, S.J., School of Divinity, St. Louis University. His 

address is: The Institute of Jesuit Sources, Fusz Memorial, 
3700 West Pine, St. Louis, Missouri 631 08. (Chairman of 
the Assistancy Seminar and Editor of its Studies) 

Hugo J. Gerleman, S.J., The Institute of Jesuit Sources, Fusz Memorial 

3700 West Pine, St. Louis, Missouri 63108. (Secretary of 
the Assistancy Seminar) 

John C. Haughey, S.J., America Staff, 106 W. 56th St., New York, N.Y. 10019 

David B. Knight, S.J., Loyola University, New Orleans, La. 70118 

Vincent J. O'Flaherty, S.J., Rockhurst College, Kansas City, Missouri 64110 

John R. Sheets, S.J., Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233 

John H. Wright, S.J., Jesuit School of Theology, 1735 Le Roy Street, 
Berkeley, California 94709 

Copyright, 1972 , by the American Assistancy Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality 

Fusz Memorial, St. Louis University 
3700 West Pine Boulevard 
St. Louis, Missouri 63108 



STUDIES 

in the Spirituality 

of Jesuits 




Two Discussions: 

I. On Spiritual Direction 

II. On Leadership and Authority 



Published by the American Assistancy Seminar on Jesuit Spirituality, 
especially for American Jesuits working out their aggiomamento 

in the spirit of Vatican Council II 

Vol. IV March, 1972 No. 2 



CONTENTS 

Page 
Editor's Foreword iv 



A DISCUSSION ON SPIRITUAL DIRECTION 

I. Introduction, by John H. Wright, S.J. 41 

II. A Summary of the Discussion 46 



A DISCUSSION ON LEADERSHIP AND AUTHORITY 

I. Introduction, by John R. Sheets, S.J. 53 

II. Comments, from Different Points of View, by: 

A. William W. Meissner, S.J. 76 

B. William J. Burke, S.J. 78 

C. Thomas E. Clarke, S.J. 79 

D. John H. Wright, S.J. 80 



A Check List: Books Available from the Institute of Jesuit Sources 82 
The Titles of the Previous Issues of These Studies 84 



111 



Editor 1 s Foreword 



The ordinary procedure in the meetings of the Assistancy Seminar 
consists of discussing a paper or papers previously prepared and distrib- 
uted by one of the members. However, on some occasions when time permits 
something else is added: round table exploration of one or another topic 
which seems currently important. Resumes of two such exploratory dis- 
cussions make up the present issue of these Studies . 

The first, on Spiritual Direction, was held on February 1 , 1970. 
Father John H. Wright presented some brief and pointed introductory re- 
marks, which were followed by free-ranging discussion. Subsequently he 
slightly revised his introduction and also compiled the summary of the 
remarks made in the discussion. 

The second, on Leadership and Authority, took place on April 17 and 
18, 1971. Father John R. Sheets introduced the topic, and others pre- 
viously assigned offered comments from specific points of view: our 
invited guest, Father William W. Meissner, S.J., and our members, Fathers 
William J. Burke, Thomas E. Clarke, and John H. Wright. Father Sheets 
too subsequently revised his introduction into the form found below. The 
report on the remarks of the others present was compiled by the present 
editor. 

Father Meissner has recently published a book pertinent to our topic 
The Assault on Authority: Dialogue or Dilemma > Maryknoll, New York: 
Orbis Books, 1971 . 



A DISCUSSION ON SPIRITUAL DIRECTION 



I. Introduction by John H. Wright, S.J. 



In the religious renewal of the Assistancy, the matter of spiritual 
direction is of the greatest importance. I wish to propose here (l) a 
description of spiritual direction, (2) an outline of its essential method, 
and (3) some questions which grow out of this. 

1 . Spiritual direction may be described as an inter-personal situa- 
tion in which one person assists another to develop and come to greater 
maturity in the life of the spirit, that is, the life of faith, hope, and 
love. To oversimplify very much for the purpose of schematizing, we may 
say that spiritual direction concerns the development of faith by dealing 
with the prayer of the person being directed. It is concerned with the 
development of hope by considering his difficulties, sufferings, dis- 
appointments and problems. And it is concerned to develop the life of 
love by treating his life in the Christian community. Actually, of course, 
each of these things — prayer, difficulties, and life in community — each 
involves faith, hope, and love. But for purposes of discussion, we may 
put them under these headings. 

It will be helpful, I think, to recall some fairly commonplace ob- 
servations to clarify what spiritual direction is not. It is not primarily 
informative, though it may sometimes be the opportunity for supplying some 
kind of knowledge, especially theological information about the meaning of 
the Christian message. Neither is spiritual direction primarily therapeu- 
tic, though therapy, of course, may be called for in some cases. Psycho- 
logical illness, if it is at all serious, needs someone who is trained 
professionally to handle such problems. And thirdly, spiritual direction 
is not primarily advisory. It is not the main function of the spiritual 
director to indicate to a man what he is to do next. Helpful suggestions 
are very much in place from time to time, but they are not the primary 
concern. 



42 



The primary function of spiritual direction is to provide assistance 
in two areas, that of clarification and that of discernment. I wish to 
develop these ideas in terms of the essential method which I think belongs 
to spiritual direction. 

2. The fundamental method of spiritual direction is conversation. 
Conversation with another enables one to objectify, to conceptualize, and 
thus to understand one ! s own living of the life of faith, hope and charity 
It is a fairly commonplace experience that if a person wishes to come to 
grips with, to appropriate, to make his own, what is going on within him, 
he must endeavor to express it, to conceptualize it, to frame it in some 
kind of words. Then, as a result of this, the person will be enabled, in 
the light of this conversation, to discern the movements and the guidance 
of God in his life. He will be able to see the divine initiative of loving 
invitation, in which God is seeking from him some kind of response. 

Since the aim of this conversation is to enable the person being 
directed to objectify and thereafter to discern his own interior life, it 
seems clear that he is far more active than the director, for he is the 
one who must conceptualize. He is the one who must objectify and then 
finally discern. He is going to be assisted by the attention, questions, 
and trusting attitude of the spiritual director. 

The relationship between the spiritual director and the one being 
directed is, in the terminology of Eric Berne and Thomas Harris, not a 
parent-child relationship, but an adult-adult relationship. It may at 
times, because of differences of development and maturity, participate to 
some degree in the parent-child relationship, but fundamentally it is not 
this. For there is no question of taking over uncritically the views, 
opinions or judgments of another simply because they are being proposed. 
It is important that every element of threat be eliminated from this 
situation of spiritual direction. The degree to which a judgmental at- 
titude on the part of the director is present makes it that much more 
difficult for the individual to achieve the kind of insight into himself 
that he needs. This would tend to create the parent-child relationship 
and not the adult-adult relationship. 



*3 



a. The objectification of experience, which the one being 
direoted is attempting to achieve is never adequate and it is never pre- 
sumed to be adequate. No one can really express in words the full in- 
sight, the complete range of experience that he has. Nevertheless, we 
can scarcely begin to understand truly what takes place within us except 
as the fruit of trying to objectify it. The very inadequacy of our for- 
mulation helps us to recognize the mystery in which we are involved in the 
personal relationship between ourselves and God. 

It may be that for some, particularly those who have made some advance 
in the spiritual life, this kind of conceptualization can be achieved in 
some other way,, for example, by keeping a journal. But in the truly forma- 
tive period* of the spiritual life, for most this would certainly be insuf- 
ficient. At this time the individual must in a conversation endeavor to 
describe to someone else whom he trusts, whose acceptance he has experienced, 
the details of his life of grace. This means first of all speaking about 
his life of prayer. He should endeavor to do this in some detail, to at- 
tend even to such things as the hour of the day at which he prays, how much 
time he prays, where he prays, what is the subject matter of his prayer, 
what metnod he employs in praying, what insights he received, what affec- 
tions come to him spontaneously and how the life of prayer overflows into 
his daily life, what effect it has upon his living. Besides describing 
his private prayer, he should speak of liturgical participation in the 
Eucharist and the sacrament of penance. 

Besides the life of prayer, the one being directed should endeavor to 
gain some understanding of his suffering, of his experience of human fini- 
tude, his anxieties, his day to day depression. Sometimes the need for 
professional help may appear here when it becomes evident that the man's 
psychological state is something other than a normal period of desolation 
or discouragement that anyone may have to go through. In this connection 
it would be important to point out that some loneliness is a preparation 
for deeper union with God. If a person found no inner emptiness at all, 
there would be no sense of invitation to go deeper into the relationship 
with God. But thi3 loneliness should never be a crushing or paralyzing 



hh 



thing. It should not destroy the basic cheerfulness and optimism of life. 
And finally, the one being directed should endeavor to objectify and 
to narrate how he gets along with others - He should tell whether he is 
developing an attitude of kindness and openness, patience, tolerance and 
cooperation, or whether there are ve~y strong elements of selfishness, 
possessiveness, manipulating others, endeavoring to make his own point of 
view and his desires prevail independently of what may promote the common 
good. In all of this, the director may assist the one whom he is directing 
by asking appropriate questions which will enable him to recognize what is 
taking place within himself. Through this objectification then, a man is 
enabled to appropriate his own inner life. 

b. Spiritual direction is also concerned with discernment. 
Concomitantly with the process of objectifying there should be that of 
discerning. The purpose of this is not that the individual may determine 
the measure of his spiritual development, but rather that he may discover 
how he ought to respond to God. By discerning what are the movements of 
the Holy Spirit within him, what are the attractions of the grace of God, 
he is enabled to see how God is guiding him and where, therefore, he must 
follow. Discernment, likewise, is chiefly the work of the one being direc* 
The spiritual director does not form his own judgments in this matter and 
then inform the one being directed, but rather he helps the man to discern. 
Sometimes this may be very obvious. The very objectification may make it 
clear which are the inspirations of the Holy Spirit and which are delusions 
and deceptions. At times, however, it may be problematic and obscure. Ar.d 
then, I think, the spiritual director can be positively helpful, provided 
he himself is led by the Spirit. To render this kind of assistance, it is 
not enough to have bookish knowledge about spiritual things, the movements 
of the Spirit, and' the rules of spiritual discernment. The director him- 
self must have a real sensitivity to the Holy Spirit and to the guidance 
of the Spirit in his own life. This will mean that he will have some ac- 
quaintance with the normal pattern of the development of the spiritual 
life, especially the life of prayer. If he lacks this, he will not be 
able to appreciate what is being described to him by the one whom he is 



15 



directing. He must know what to look for in terms of the fruits of the 
Spirit and works of the flesh as they are described by St. Paul in Gal. 5: 
19-23* But apart from certain extraordinary cases of scruples or similar 
disturbances, the spiritual director cannot simply demand obedience to his 
discernment but must lead the individual to discern himself. He can do 
this by questions, by instructions on the principles of discernment, by 
suggestions, but in the end the man himself will have to identify within 
him what really is the invitation of the Holy Spirit to which he is called 
upon to respond. 

One consequence of having a relationship like this with a spiritual 
director is the possibility of great flexibility in living the life of the 
Spirit. It makes it possible to organize one ! s life in a very flexible 
way and still remain honest, still remain free of self deception and delu- 
sion, able to avoid such facile slogans as, "My life of prayer is just 
what I do for other people." If a person is willing to objectify in some 
detail his internal life of faith, hope and charity and to make an honest 
effort at discernment as he speaks about this with someone else, he will 
not easily be deceived in matters such as the time to be given to prayer, 
or the frequency of participation in the sacrifice of the Mass. These 
things will not be matters of inflexible rule but they will be matters in 
which honest, genuine discernment of the motions of the Holy Spirit takes 
place. 

3. I wish, then, against the background of these remarks to propose 
questions for discussion. 

First, does a person ever completely outgrow the need or the use- 
fulness of living in this kind of situation; that is, of having a spiritual 
director? It is clear that during the period of a man's formation spiritual 
direction is indispensable; but when the period of formation is over, when 
a man has his last vows and is living in a regular community, is spiritual 
direction now completely superfluous? Or is it still genuinely helpful and 
profitable, so that it should be recommended to everyone in the Assistancy 
that he have someone to whom he goes at times and describes as best he can 
the development of his life of grace, his faith, hope, and love? 



46 



Second, if spiritual direction is primarily assisting someone to 
objectify and to discern in the life of grace, can this be done also in 
groups? Is it possible for a group of people who trust one another to 
discuss together what is their life of prayer, what are their particular 
problems, what is their life in community. There is no question of going 
into confessional matters, but of discussing the life of the spirit and 
the growth of faith, hope and charity. Is it possible that mutual com- 
munication at this level could be a matter of great assistance in the life 
of grace? 



II. A Summary of the Discussion 

The discussion which followed these remarks ranged over a wide field. 
The following summary, without producing an artificial unity or giving 
the names of those who proffered opinions, attempts to bring observations 
on the same topic into relationship with one another and to highlight the 
main points or opinions expressed. 

1 . Is it not necessary at times for the spiritual director to take 
the initiative, to endeavor to make a breakthrough, to overcome routine 
when nothing seems to be going on? 

In this case the director should ask questions to find out why nothing 
is going on. St. Ignatius thought in a retreat, if there are no experiences 
of consolation and desolation, the director should find out what the man is 
doing, how he is performing the exercises. Something of the same thing is 
true here; for frequently it means that the man has not really got any in- 
sight into what is happening, into what he is doing. However, we should 
observe that there are periods in which growth is so gradual that it is 
not possible to observe progress. The man is able to live in community in 
an open, loving, supportive fashion and to do his work. This is evidence 
of a very fruitful life of prayer. The director should not feel, in these 
situations, that he is doing nothing, for, in some sense, this is to miss 
the point. In spiritual direction, it is the man who is being directed 



^7 



who is most active, and the sincerity and honesty in which he objectifies 
his own situation to another gives him an insight into himself which he 
could not have alone. 

At times, of course, it may become clear that some kind of break- 
through is indeed necessary. But it is not possible for the director 
simply to say this. He must endeavor to lead the other by questioning, 
suggestion and encouragement. 

2. It was said that the relationship between the spiritual director 
and the one he is directing should be an adult-adult relationship; but 
should not the spiritual director have some kind of ascendancy? 

The case here seems to be very similar to the educational situation. 
Some kind of ascendancy on the part of the teacher is helpful. But finally, 
the one being educated is not just supposed to take over the judgments 
and observations of the teacher, but to make his own judgments and to 
achieve his own development. In the parent-child relationship, the child 
simply takes over someone else ! s valuation, judgments and principles, and 
he acts upon them without ever having really reflected upon them, without 
making them his own by a personal appropriation. You must indeed have 
respect for your spiritual director and a recognition of the fact that he 
accepts you, that he is worthy of your trust, and that he has wisdom and 
understanding . 

3. This relates, I think, to the question raised a moment ago (above 
in ), on page 45) , whether every Jesuit would profit by having a spiritual 
director. If this is the case, then evidently it is not necessary always 
to find someone who is farther along than you are. It is necessary to find 
someone whom you recognize as a spiritual man, a man of prayer, a man whom 
you respect. If he is older and farther advanced, this may be an advantage, 
but it is not necessary. Whoever does help me to objectify my situation 
and to discern, is indeed a spiritual director as we have described him. 

Is not the relationship you have described very often that which ob- 
tains between the confessor and the penitent? Here there is not just a 
question of confessing moral failures, but of taking a measure of the whole 
life of prayer. Most Jesuits probably do have a regular confessor, but it 



48 



is hard to say how much of this goes on. It is likely that normally there 
is an accounting of small failures and a renewal of sorrow, but not any 
extensive or detailed discussion of the 3 if e of prayer; though it may be 
that this is beginning to happen more frequently in the confession situation, 

Perhaps the relationship between Christ and the Apostles, as described 
in the Gospel, can be some kind of help, or image, for the kind of relation- 
ship there should be between the spiritual director and those whom he di- 
rects. This was very much an interpersonal relationship. They were really 
friends. From the outlines in the Gospel we have the impression that there 
was real give and take of intimacy and trust and friendship, and yet, this 
man was God. He was their master and Lord. John could put his head on His 
breast at the Last Supper. It is not, perhaps, too much to ask that the 
spiritual director become in a sense a sacrament for the individual whom 
he directs, that he manifest through his compassion, his listening, the 
presence of God. The spiritual director does not merely listen, but he 
has the desire to bring this man to the Father. At times too he will ex- 
press himself very directly and function as a guide, though the individual 
himself should do the discerning as much as possible. It is necessary for 
the director to develop a kind of sixth sense so he will know when it is 
required for him to step in and say what is to be said. 

It seems, in the light of all that we have been saying, that any 
Christian who takes his Christian life seriously, should have some kind of 
'spiritual director. And yet, in the providence of God, something like this 
is very rarely available, even to the seriously committed Christian. I 
wonder how unavailable it is. If people are leading the life of the Spirit, 
and are serious about it, can they not talk to one another about what is 
going on and receive some sort of enlightenment and help and strength fix 
one another? The very effort to conceptualize will give them insights that 
they would not have otherwise. A husband and wife, who are endeavoring to 
live a serious Christian life, could speak to each other about their life 
of prayer, and even have a life of prayer in common to * ^^^y great extent. 
This would be, in some sense, a matter of spiritual direction. 

But to speak simply to a companion, a peer, may be to speak to another 



^9 



who has the same kind of blind spots that you have. This makes one proviso 
necessary. When there is question of a peer group, it is necessary that 
they have reached some real maturity. Novices could not well act as spirit- 
ual guides for one another, nor juniors, nor scholastics generally, because 
often much necessary insight would be lacking. 

4. It seems possible, as time goes on, that we begin to think of our- 
selves as having so much competence and experience that we feel unable to 
go to someone else and ask his help and advice. It is questionable then 
whether this is the unavailability of spiritual directors or simply a matter 
of human pride. We recognize that in seeking a spiritual director we need 
to find someone who will not merely sit there and listen, but who will, by 
his personality and presence, tend to draw more out of us. He must be some- 
one whom you can trust; someone whom you recognize accepts you. But is it 
not possible that this relationship be built up gradually? If you are con- 
cerned to have a particular person as your spiritual director, since you 
recognize that he is prayerful and competent, you could, over a period of 
time, build up a relationship with him. Thus, it would not be a desperate 
situation, but the ordinary needs of life that would bring you to a spirit- 
ual director, the ordinary needs that you have for understanding yourself, 
your interior, and of discerning the presence and the activity of God. 

5. Some of this points to a common weakness of Jesuits, a kind of 
individualism that makes it difficult for many to pray in groups or to 
share their spiritual insights with one another. Praying in a group could 
be a remedy for this individualism and enable Jesuits to profit by spiritual 
direction. It seems, in some ways, that we are moving into an era that has 
much to do with groups and that much of our spiritual direction may well 

be accomplished in the future in groups. It will never completely take 
the place of the one to one relationship in a situation of spiritual 
direction, but one of the tasks facing us is to create an atmosphere in 
community where one can express himself, not just to one individual but 
to the group, very personally and intimately and be accepted by that group. 
This tendency is very noteworthy in the younger men. They are reacting 
against a depersonalized hotel existence. At the same time there is 



50 



occasionally some distrust beneath the comraderie which is often in evidence. 
It might be said in summary that while a person is learning, a one to one 
situation is desirable, but a final fruit of this should be the possibility 
of fraternal direction in common. 

6. It has been suggested that the manifestation of conscience, in a 
broader sense, could handle much of the matter of spiritual direction. 
There is a problem here, however, that as soon as the spiritual director 
becomes a man who has authority, you have introduced into the situation, 
whether you want to or not, an element of threat. The superior always has 
to be concerned with the common good of the whole, and the question neces- 
sarily continues to enter in concerning this man ! s qualifications. It be- 
comes a problem for a man to be as frank and open and honest as he would 
be in a situation where there is no threat. At times, the younger men 
seem to be quite open and not to be bothered by this element of authority 
in the one with whom they are speaking. Nevertheless, at other times this 
does seem to be a major consideration, even in the novitiate. No universal 
solution from this point of view seems possible therefore. 

7. In answer to the question of whether everyone should have a spir- 
itual director, it is at least useful that each should have someone who 
knows him well, so that when something does come up he can go to one who 
will have the context, at least to some extent, of the particular problem 
or difficulty about which he wishes to consult. Further, many older men 
as well as recently ordained priests need spiritual direction. 

8. Some qualities of a spiritual director seem to be these. He 
should have sympathetic understanding so that the person who consults him 
will feel that he is being accepted without being judged. He should also 
have a wisdom so that he not only understands the particular problem or 
situation but is able to relate it to a broader development. He should 
also have a genuine spirituality; that is, a real sensitivity to the spirit. 
He should not be precipitous, but prudent and prayerful. These seem to be 
the qualities which are most important in a spiritual director. They will 
give him an uncomplicated basic attitude which comes from being led by 

the Spirit. And they will develop a high regard for the integrity of 



51 



another and a respect for his distinct characteristics. 

9. If we ask whether every Jesuit is a potential spiritual director, 
or whether there is a special charism that only some possess, we meet a 
real problem. Someone observed that out of eighty Jesuits in a particular 
community, he discovered only three whom he felt he could relate to as a 
spiritual director. But this may well be a matter of personalities rather 
than of competence of all these seventy-seven others. 

10.. One could ask further: How important is the priesthood for being 
a spiritual director? Is friendship between the director and the one being 
directed an asset or a debit? 

In some scholasticates, it has been found very helpful to associate 
members of the faculty directly in the matter of spiritual direction of 
scholastics. This tends to emphasize the importance of spiritual direction. 
If the spiritual directors themselves get together once or twice a month 
to talk about spiritual matters and to pray together, this also underlines 
the importance that is attached to this matter. It tends to develop within 
the community a spiritual atmosphere in which one is able to speak even in 
a large group about matters which are very personal and spiritual. 

Some aspects of being a spiritual director can be taught, and even 
non-priests can exercise this function. Very ancient tradition has unor- 
dained monks and also nuns acting as spiritual directors. It is important 
that our priests regard spiritual direction as important. They are men of 
the Church and it would T?e unfortunate if only a few Jesuits were spiritual 
men, or if the community as a whole could manifest a concern only for the 
superficial, for who won an athletic contest, for example. When the source 
of difficulty in a matter of spiritual direction and the living of the 
spiritual life lies in a poor community, it seems that there is very 
little that can be done. 



A DISCUSSION ON LEADERSHIP AND AUTHORITY 



Introduction by John R. Sheets, S.J. 

In its meeting of April 17 and 18, 1971 » the Assistancy Seminar on 
Jesuit Spirituality held a discussion on leadership and authority. In 
addition to the regular members of the Seminar Father William W. Meissner 
was present to give his own contribution. His remarks touched on some of 
the points covered in his recent book, The Assault on Authority: Dialogue 
pr Dilemma ? (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1971 )• Several of the mem- 
bers took a particular aspect of leadership and authority to present as 
their own input. Father Burke approached the topic with special reference 
to various authors who have treated it. Father Clarke viewed it from the 
Ignatian souroes. Father Wright presented in capsule form ideas from a 
symposium on the subject of leadership and authority held at Alma in 1964. 

I was asked to start the discussion by presenting a position paper. 
That fact accounts for disproportionate lengths in the following reports. 
My own paper was expected to attempt to develop the topic at some length. 
For this reason it takes the lion's share of the space in the presentation 
that follows. In this written presentation it is not possible to recreate 
the informal atmosphere and the tone of dialogue and discussion which char- 
acterized our meeting. 

I. Leadership and Authority: Distinct but Complementary poles 

We can begin by asking some questions concerning leadership and au- 
thority. Hopefully the subsequent presentations by the other members of 
the group will throw some light on the answers to these questions. First 
of all, is there a distinction between authority and leadership? If so, 
how could such a distinction be described? How are leadership and au- 
thority related to each other? Is it possible for leadership and author- 
ity (if they are distinct) to be at odds? How can leadership and authority 
be brought together in order to achieve the best possible results? What 



5^ 



is the basis for leadership and for authority? "What are the main problems 
involved in leadership and authority? To what extent do leadership and 
authority take their shape from the particular period of history where 
they are found? 

These are some of the questions that come to mind concerning author- 
ity and leadership. We hope that asking all of these questions will not 
give the impression that we shall come up with answers to all of them. 
We would like, however, to probe into these questions and at least at- 
tempt to come up with some conclusions. Hopefully, my conclusions and 
also the processes by which I arrived at them will be tested, supplemented, 
and if necessary corrected by the various points of view from the other 
members. 

A. The Relationship between Leadership and Authority 

We can anticipate our conclusion by putting it at the very beginning 
of the inquiry. Leadership and authority are not the same. They are, how- 
ever, closely related. Both can be defined as personal powers effecting 
converging unity . The origin and nature of these respective powers are 
not the same, and the way they effect unity is not the same. However, 
both modalities (that of leadership and that of authority) are necessary 
if the unity to be attained is to engage the whole person and open him to 
the totality of the union to be achieved, and not merely to an aspect of it. 
Anticipating much of what will be said later, we can say that not every 
leader is an authority. However, it is possible (and desirable) that an 
authority have the characteristics of a leader as well as be an authority. 
These are ideas which we would like to try to clarify. 

1 . Leadership 

First of all we can consider some general characteristics of leader- 
ship, then speak of some specific types, then move on to consider authority. 

Like many elementary experiences leadership is a phenomenon which is 
obvious until we try to describe it. History is filled with people who are 
considered leaders. However, when we look at the wide variety of persons 



55 

covered by this term "leader," we begin to wonder if they have anything 
at all in common. There are military leaders, social and political leaders, 
religious leaders, intellectual leaders, not to speak of boy scout leaders, 
orchestra leaders, business leaders, and the like. All of these have some- 
thing in common, but at the same time they are so different. This leads 
us to the realization that leadership is an analogous notion. 

If leadership is an analogous notion, then there is a common denom- 
inator underlying all the varieties of leadership we mentioned. This com- 
mon denominator would seem to be a power to draw others beyond the point 
where they presently find themselves to a point of greater realization 
of their common aspirations. It is a power to draw others toward a center 
of closer unity, a unity which is always converging. 

By its very nature leadership implies a certain standing out from the 
group which is led, as well as a standing ahead. This implies both a dis- 
tance from the group, as well as an identification with the group. The 
idea of distance implies that the leader already has a high degree of 
realization of the goal to be attained. At the same time he is identified 
with the aspirations of the group. 

The leader is an effective symbol incarnating the aspirations of the 
group. He renders present the goal in a hopeful way. In him others see 
their own hopes as realizable. The leader is a provocative and evocative 
symbol of what the group wants to be or to attain, while he stands with- 
in the group, he has at the same time a certain transcendence, being a- 
head of the group, as one who has alreay realized the goal to a large 
extent, and who now acts as a focal point drawing others to the real- 
ization of the same goal. The leader stands with his face toward the 
group, as drawing them. But at the same time he is the corporate face 
of the group toward the goal, and he serves as the representative of the 
group to others. He is the symbol of the realizability and tangibleness 
of the goal. In brief, the leader is a symbolic, effective presence, 
whose power to lead comes from the fact that he can draw into a focus 
the common aspirations of a group, at a point beyond where they find 
themselves, because of the fact that the goal of their aspirations is 



56 



already realized in himself to a large degree. Thus he renders that goal 
present to the group in a tangible and attractive way. 

2. The Components of Leadership : Ethos, Pneuma, Logos 
Leadership has three basic components: ethos . pneuma . and logos . 
Authority, on the other hand, belongs to the realm of nomos (law). We 
shall speak of authority later. At present we would like to investigate 
the components of leadership that will be found in various proportions 
wherever genuine leadership is present. All of these elements are always 
found together. They are distinguishable but not separable. However, 
there are different types of leadership depending on which one of the 
characteristics is most prominent. 

Ethos is that aspect of leadership which has to do with values . In 
a very particular sense it has to do with those values which concern moral 
choices . Where ethos is the dominant note, the group, goal, leader, and 
means, are all linked together in a vital network of common values. The 
leader himself is in someway the embodiment of these values. By his 
imaginative and creative living of these values he draws others to their 
attainment. His own convictions are magnetic. They are not like money 
kept in a vault which one can withdraw when he needs the cash. Hi3 ap- 
propriation of the values acts as a powerful drawing force, bringing the 
aspirations of the group to a convergent unity. This aspect of leader- 
ship is seen in those who are religious leaders, such as Ignatius, Francis 
of Assisi, to name but a couple of examples. Similarly this aspect of 
leadership is found in those who are great social leaders like Gandhi and 
Martin Luther King. The strength of this leadership depends on two things: 
the leader's personal appropriation of the values, measured by the degree 
he will sacrifice himself for them, and the extent to which he can set 
others afire with these same moral values. 

Pneuma . in the second place, is that aspect of leadership which has 
to do with the power transmitted by the leader, and the power that is 
aroused in the group. It has the characteristics of inspiration, en- 
thusiasm, energy, movement, and momentum. In itself it is like the wind, 
which can either bring a soft and gentle rain, or can whip up a destructive 



57 



storm. This aspect of leadership seems to be in a particular way the realm 
of the demonic . The importance of discernment of spirits is found with 
particular urgency here. There is a hypnotic effect in pneuma that can 
blind a person to ethos (values) and logos (judgment). It is like a sail- 
ing vessel where the tremendous power of the wind takes over, and the 
navigator and helmsman are helpless in the presence of such power. 

Ethos and logos act as channeling structures for pneuma . The leader- 
ship which can inspire followers with enthusiasm is like the power to open 
the sluices of a dam. Unless the forces that are released are controlled, 
there is a devastating flood. 

On the other hand, leadership of ethos and logos would be stagnant 
without the characteristic of pneuma . Leadership must transmit inspi- 
ration. It must release the powers of the spirit within the group. In 
the case of pneuma that which links leader, those led, the goal, and the 
means is the same dvnamis . the same power. It is from communication of 
this power to the group that leadership constantly overcomes the inertia 
of the group. Leadership taps the hidden resources of spirit in the group, 
brings them into active engagement. It acts like a torch to set others 
afire. Such leadership galvanizes people who are moderately interested 
into a band of crusaders. 

We have commented on the ambiguity of this particular characteristic 
of leadership. Under the influence of powerful inspiration the temptation 
rises to begin a holy war on others. This is always a sign of the demonic. 
Where the holy war is declared first of all on oneself, and a holy peace 
declared on others, we have a sign of the Holy Pneuma . There is a dif- 
ference between a mob with a cause, and a holy people with a mission. 
One is a destructive power. The other shows the strength of its power 
very often by using means which seem to be powerless in order to accom- 
plish its goals. 

In the third place, logos is that characteristic of leadership re- 
lated to judgment. This aspect of leadership can be described in various 
ways: reason, rule, guidance, orientation, balance, discretion, prudence, 
savoir-faire, intelligence, knowledge. This has to be a characteristic 



58 



wherever genuine leadership is found. But in certain cases leadership is 
based mainly on the characteristic of knowledge. It is the person's pre- 
eminent knowledge or prudence which constitutes his leadership. Sometimes 
we see the intellectual leadership in one person, and the leadership of 
inspiration largely in another. An obvious case is that of Marx and Engels. 
Marx was the theoretician, and Engels the propagandist of Marxism. 

Under the characteristic of logos we find many types of leadership, 
ranging from the theoretician to the tactician. In every case, however, 
the power of the leader is seen in the power of his judgment to give a 
constant and consistent shape to the aspirations of the group. When this 
particular quality disappears, leadership is gone. If the group still re- 
tains its pneuma , it will become a destructive force when the leadership 
of reason goes, unless it is replaced by another leader who has the power 
to mold the enthusiasm of the group and teach them the measured steps they 
have to take to get to the goal. 

Genuine leadership, as we have said, comprises all three of these 
characteristic of ethos , pneuma . logos . However, they are found in varying 
degrees, very often with one of the characteristics assuming a particular 
prominence to the point where one might be designated according to one of 
these, as a moral or ethical leader, a charismatic leader, an intellectual 
leader. 

3. Authority 
Authority is a particular mode of leadership that can impose nomos . 
law, obligation. Our supposition is that there are two distinct species 
of leadership coming under the one genus. There is first of all the 
leadership we have spoken of above, with the characteristics of ethos . 
pneuma . and logos : then there is the leadership of nomos . We can describe 
the difference between the two when we realize the different ways in which 
they effect the convergent unity. The leadership we have spoken of above 
works by drawing others to an effective realization of the goals. It 
transmits attraction . The leadership of authority has as its specific 
characteristic the transmission of the imperative. It does not merely 



59 



exhort or persuade, but it commands . 

The distinctive characteristics of these two modes of leadership seems 
to be rooted in the very structure of personhood as a created exemplatum 
of the divine exemplar. It is a favorite theme of both Augustine and 
Aquinas that God does not only give man a share in his existence. He 
also shares his power to communicate existence. Among the various ways 
of communicating existence, there is the particular mode of communicating 
existence by being a focal point of unity . This is not the same, of course, 
as communicating existence in the sense of having a child, for example. In 
another sense, however, it is the communication of an existence-in-union . 
To draw others into a new mode of union or communion is a way of commu- 
nicating existence. 

God's own orientation toward creatures is shown in the twofold way 
that he draws all things to himself, first of all through the attraction 
of his goodness. But while he draws all things by attraction, including 
persons, he draws persons in another way also. He draws them by compelling , 
them. Of course, when we speak of God compelling, we do not mean to deny 
human freedom. It is God's power to command human freedom, which, while 
leaving man free, imposes an obligation to do God's will. 

The whole world is brought to a convergent unity through God's at- 
traction and through his commanding. Both of these are ways in which the 
knot of unity is being tightened through time and space. 

God has shared these power to communicate existence-in-closer-unity 
with man. Leadership is the sharing in God's goodness to attract. Au- 
thority is the sharing in his power to command. Each of them are modes 
effecting unity from different points of view. Each of them is necessary. 
The whole world is moved both by the desirability of God's goodness and 
at the same time by the seriousness of that goodness, which is another 
way of saying that the whole world lies under the compelling influence 
of God. He has graciously shared both types of influence with man. 

There are those, of course, who would disagree with our analysis of 
authority and leadership which we see as based on an ontology. Depend- 
ing upon their own particular point of view, it is possible for some to 



60 



view these ideas only from the perspective of sociology or psychology. 
Some would see authority merely as a pragmatic answer to getting things 
done with a minimum of waste. However, we would see authority and leader- 
ship as flowing from man's created sharing in God's own power to commu- 
nicate existence. 

There is no doubt that leadership and authority take on different 
tonalities depending on the particular point of history where they are 
found. However, it seems that they are realities which are rooted in the 
very nature of created existence, if one is willing to admit that created 
existence mirrors forth the uncreated existence of God, whose providence 
is drawing all things to a goal. Men are not only provided for by God, 
but they are sharers in his power to provide. One of the main ways in 
which they provide is through the leadership of attraction and the leader- 
ship of authority. Both are modes of providing for greater and greater 
union, in one way through attraction, in another through command. It is 
in this way that God's own providence is effective, both attracting and 
commanding. In a sense man is God's vicegerent on earth. He not only 
provides for other men, but he provides for God, by drawing men closer 
to the unity which is willed by God's providence. 

4. Leadership and Authority "in the Lord ." 

In this real order God's providence is exercised in history through 
Jesus Christ. He is the one who has completely provided God for man, and 
man for God. It is through him that the divine plan is realized. He is 
the one who is the embodiment of God's attractive, redemptive goodness, 
on the one hand, and on the other, he is the one who transmits the divine 
imperative. He is supreme leader in every sense. The idea of Christ's 
leadership is thematic in the letter to the Hebrews. "Let us not lose 
sight of Jesus, who leads us in our faith and brings it to perfection" 
(Heb. 12:2). Christ is the one who goes before us, drawing us to him- 
self into the sanctuary where he continually intercedes for us. Forming 
one community with believers of all ages, we find in Jesus our common 
attraction, and our common Lord. 

Because of the incarnation and redemption there is no such thing as 



61 



an attraction and a command to a unity which is merely formal. All leader- 
ship and authority are "in the Lord." The unity to which they lead are 
"in the Lord." There is no such thing as a purely secular authority or 
leadership, or a purely secular center of unity. All authentic leader- 
ship, as well as all authentic unity brought about by leadership, is in 
some way "in the Lord," since the whole of the universe is "in the Lord." 
"In him were created all things in heaven and on earth . . . all things 
were created through him and for him. Before anything was created, he 
existed, and he holds all things in unity. . . . God wanted all per- 
fection to be found in him and all things to be reconciled through him 
and for him, everything in heaven and everything on earth, when he made 
peace by his death on the cross" (Col. 1:1 5) • 

There are, of course, degrees of this authentically Christie leader- 
ship and unity. They range from the remote, anonymously Christie form, 
through the natural forms of leadership which are taken up "in the Lord," 
up to the form of leadership and authority which is in the Church, which 
is not only "in the Lord," but "from the Lord." 

Because of the incarnation and redemption, and the sending of the 
Spirit, every mode of leadership has a new dimension, even though it is 
not explicitly recognized. Paul frequently brings out this new dimension 
in his letters where he speaks of obedience "in the Lord." "Be considerate 
to those who are working amongst you and are above you in the Lord as your 
teachers" (1 Thess. 5:12) . "Wives, give way to your husbands, as you 
should in the Lord . . . . Children, be obedient to your parents always, 
because that is what will please the Lord . . . . Slaves, be obedient to 
the men who are called your master in this world . . . out of resoect for 
the Master . "Whatever your work is, put your heart into it as it were for 
the Lord and not for men, knowing that the Lord will repay you by making 
you his heirs. It is Christ the Lord you are serving " (Col. 3:18); see 
also Eph. 5:21 ; 6:1 ). 

The total force of God ! s goodness is rendered attractive in the flesh 
of Christ, as that flesh submitted to the Father's will, even to the death 
of the cross, and was raised to the right hand of the Father. "And when 



62 



I am lifted up from the earth, I shall draw all men to myself" (John 12:^2). 
The world moves forward to its ultimate end through the powerful attraction 
of Christ. All genuine leadership is moving the world at least in a remote 
way to the climax of that attractive presence. 

God's own imperative for the world is embodied in Christ to be trans- 
mitted to the world. "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given 
to me. Go, therefore, make disciples of all the nations. . . . And know 
that I am with you always; yes, to the end of time (Matt. 28:18). God's 
imperative is not a blind force commanding some type of an ethical action. 
The seriousness and the concern of his love turns an exhortative into an 
imperative. His own ultimate concern is that men be fulfilled in his Son. 
His command to do is only a function of his will that we be, that we take 
on the image of the Son. 

All genuine authority in some way is transmitting this imperative to 
take on the image of the Son, just as all genuine leadership is drawing 
us to that image. But it is in the Church that we see and experience in 
a direct and explicit way both the leadership of attraction and the leader- 
ship of authority of Christ. 

All other forms of leadership are in a sense "natural" forms that are 
taken up into Christ's own leadership. They come as it were "from below," 
and are taken up into what comes "from above." But leadership and au- 
thority in the Church are totally from above. Not that they enter into 
time and history as some foreign element. But they are the extension of 
the mystery of the incarnation and redemption. The Church sacramentalizes 
Christ's authority and his leadership, as it sacramentalizes every aspect 
of Christ. The Eucharist is a helpful comparison. The reality of the 
Eucharist, Christ, is totally from above, though the elements which are 
changed into his body and blood come from the work of human hands. In a 
similar way, Christ's own authority and leadership are sacramentalized in 
the Church. Within the Church there are different levels on which this 
takes place. The sacramentalization of his authority is found in a spe- 
cial way in those who succeed in the role of Peter and the apostles, who 
are effective symbols of Christie unity, having the authority to transmit 



63 



the imperative of Christ's leadership. 

The leadership of attraction is also sacramentalized in the Church. 
This is not limited to those who have the leadership of authority. It is 
found wherever the attractiveness of Christ is rendered present and visible 

l 

in a person. 

The leadership of attraction where it is specifically Christie comes 
about because there is a new ethos , a new pneuma . and a new logos . The 
leadership of authority directs its imperative according to a new nomos . 
which is that of the unity of all men in Christ. Let us comment briefly 
on the new ethos , pneuma . and logos , and then briefly on the new nomos 
which is transmitted by ecclesial authority. 

First of all there is a new ethos . The values of Christ subsume the 
ethos of mere morality, and draw morality within the larger context of 
holiness. It is no longer simply a question of the pursuit of values 
which are good, and avoidance of what is evil. Rather the ultimate value 
is seen to be in the holiness that comes from being -with, from communion 
with the Son. What took place in St. Paul in a dramatic way takes place 
in every Christian in a genuine but perhaps undramatic fashion. He de- 
scribed how all of his old values were transformed through his union with 
Christ, what he used to value he considers now only as refuse (Phil. ~}:7) • 

Similarly there is a new pneuma . The Holy Spirit is the power who is 
given to us to create communion. He is not a blind force, but he has the 
eyes and the heart of the Son, and by his very nature leads all things to 
their Christie unity. Leadership in the Lord draws on the new energies of 
the Spirit given to us in such abundance between the first and second 
coming of Christ. A new type of fire burns in the heart of the Christian 
leader, the fire of the Holy Spirit. Such a leader attempts to transmit 
this gentle violence to others, to ignite them with this same fire. 

Again leadership in the Lord has a new logos . "In your minds you 
must be the same as Christ Jesus" (Phil. 2:5). "We are those who have 
the mind of Christ" (1 Cor. 2:16). The one who has the mind of Christ 
draws all things into a unity that comes from a faith- insight. Such a 
leader has a "feel" for the things of Christ, and for the paths that lead 



64 



to greater union in Christ. 

There is therefore a special Christie modality to all leadership and 
authority, but this is conscious and overt and in a special way sacramen- 
talized in Christian leadership and authority. This does not come from 
absorbing certain cultural attitudes, but from being drawn into the orbit 
of Christ 1 s own power to attract and command. Christian leadership and 
authority participates in the drawing and centering power of Christ him- 
self. 

Christian authority is under a new nomas, and transmits the imperative 
of that nomos . This is not only the "law of love" in the sense of attraction, 
It is the law of love insofar as it imposes the obligation that governs the 
mode in which what is vaguely called the "law of love" operates effectively. 
Law without love is sterile structure. Love without law is willful and 
capricious. 

In any case, both leadership "in the Lord" and authority "in the Lord" 
have the same purpose, to bring men to that converging unity which we call 
the Kingdom of Christ. They are different modalities of the power to ef- 
fect that Christie unity. They support each other. We are under the 
attraction of Christ through those who mediate this attraction, while at 
the same time we are under the imperative of Christ, through those who 
mediate this imperative. 

As was said above, we all feel more at home with attraction than we 
do with compulsion. Leadership resonates with our self-will, while au- 
thority suggests the giving up of my self-will. Perhaps these two as- 
pects of leading will never be perfectly at home in our fallen human 
nature. If we were perfectly at home in the Son, as he himself was per- 
fectly at home in the Father, then there would not be that unnatural ten- 
sion in our hearts between freedom and authority. 

The ultimate answer to the problem of freedom as responding to an 
appeal, and freedom as responding to obligation, lies in the relation- 
ship of the self to the one who is appealing and the one who is com- 
manding. If we looked at this process as taking place in one and the 
same person, there would be no contradiction between what he does because 



65 



he responds to a certain attraction, and what he does because he imposes 
an obligation on himself. The tension is resolved because one and the 
same person is both the one who responds, as well as the one who imposes 
obligation on himself. If for example a person were attracted to marriage, 
and also imposed on himself the obligation to get married, there would not 
be the tension we ordinarily experience between attraction and obligation. 

If we understand our relationship to Christ and to the Father properly, 
then we see that there is ultimately no objective basis for this tension, 
because the command and the response are coming from the same person. 
Christ commanding is ourselves responding. The law of Christ is not some- 
thing alien to us, or imposed from without. It is the law of our being, 
rendered visible and audible, in a special way in the Church, which mediates 
the law of Christ. In our Head, we command ourselves. As members, we obey 
the law of our being, expressed through our Head, Christ. 

This is not some trickery with language. If our true image is that 
of the Son, then it is not an imposition to have our true image imposed 
on us. "And we, with our unveiled faces reflecting like mirrors the bright- 
ness of the Lord, all grow brighter and brighter as we are turned into the 
image that we reflect; this is the work of the Lord who is Spirit" (2 Cor. 
3:18). A law which imposes on us the exigencies inherent in our humanity, 
is not an imposition on our genuine humanity, though it may irritate in 
us what resists such congenial imposition. Similarly, and much more 
radically, the law which imposes on us the demands of sonship coming from 
our relationship with Christ is not a genuine imposition, but an exposition 
of what we are, put in the imperative to become what we are. Augustine as 
usual puts it quite succinctly: "When you found him displeasing, it was 
your corruption which he displeased" ( Sermon 58). 

This is the ultimate answer to the problem of freedom and authority. 
These are not intrinsically antagonistic aspects of human existence, even 
though in practice they are often at odds. Genuine authority "in the Lord" 
is only the external ordering of the intrinsic ordering of all things in 
Christ and for Christ. The source of our freedom is also the source of 
authority, one and the same person who compels us sweetly from within and 



66 



who compels us stringently from without. 

Yet in our lives in practice there will always be an uneasy truce be- 
tween these two aspects of our being drawn to Christ. We all suffer more 
or less from a schizoid mentality, where we feel an antagonism between free- 
dom and law. All of us suffer to some extent the same feeling experienced 
by Jeremias. He "did and he didn't" want to preach the word of God. He 
felt an ambivalence in carrying out the mission he was given. "I used to 
say, 'I will not think about him, I will not speak in his name any more. 1 
Then there seemed to be a fire burning in my heart, imprisoned in my bones. 
The effort to restrain it wearied me, I could not bear it" (Jer. 20:9)- 
All of us feel to some extent the "threat" of authority to our own freedom, 
just as Jeremias felt his whole being threatened by the mission given to 
him by God. 

Before moving on to the next section, it might be helpful to sum up 
what we have said so far. We spoke of leadership and authority as being 
defined by two main ideas: first of all, they are powers, secondly, they 
are powers to effect convergent unity. As powers, they have different 
modes of effecting the same unity. Leadership emphasizes power to effect 
unity through the appeal of attraction. Authority is a power to effect 
unity by declaring the imperative. We spoke, then, of the three com- 
ponents of leadership, ethos . oneuma . and logos . The leadership of au- 
thority, on the other hand, has to do with nomos . Though these words are 
translatable into English by words which are more or less their equivalent, 
we prefer to keep the Greek words because they seem to be richer than our 
English words. They are what could be called primordial words, with many 
overtones. 

We saw that both modes of leadership are rooted ultimately in a 
sharing in God's own power to provide for others. He provides, both 
through the attraction of his goodness (in this sense "leading" the world), 
and through the imperative of his will written on our hearts, expressed in 
law mediated by legitimate authority. 

We saw how all aspects of leadership take on a different dimension 
after the incarnation. Leadership and authority are "baptized." They 



67 



are "in the Lord." This is true in a remote sense of leadership wherever 
it is found authentically. But in a special way it is true where leader- 
ship is the extension of Christ's own drawing as well as the power to 
apply his own imperative to each moment of history, as we find with au- 
thority in the Church. 

Finally we saw that the ultimate resolution (though this remains 
largely theoretical for us in this life) between freedom and authority 
comes from the fact that the one who commands is commanding himself, be- 
cause it is Christ who commands, and it is Christ who obeys. It is our 
genuine Self who obliges us, since Christ is our genuine Self, and his 
genuine Self in us, through his Spirit, who responds. 

In the light of these remarks it is easy to see how Ignatius ex- 
pressed an authentic vision of leadership and authority. He spoke so 
often of seeing the superior as Christ. He even spoke of obeying the 
cook in the kitchen as Christ our Lord. He had the mystic's sense of the 
dimension added to, and embracing all natural leadership and authority, 
through the incarnation. Now such leadership and authority are "in the 
Lord." This means that it is Christ drawing and Christ commanding through 
human leaders and human authorities. He never saw this as meaning that 
superiors had a "hot line" to Christ. But he did see them as the symbol 
of Christ's own drawing and commanding power, effectively present. Ec- 
clesial authority is in a special way from Christ, for Christ, and Jjq 
Christ. It is a share in his own modality of drawing men to the Father. 
Authority in religious life has an "ecclesial" shape. It is in a special 
way related to authority in the Church. 

B. Some Differences between Leadership and Authority 

We would like to point out some differences in the way that leader- 
ship and authority achieve this convergent unity. In some respects this 
is saying in different words what we have already spoken of above. At 
the same time it will help us see more clearly their distincitve but com- 
plementary roles. 

In the first place, leadership depends to a large extent on natural 
endowment . It is the expression of the "attractive" side of a person's 



68 



gifts — his intelligence, vivacity, goodness — and the extent to which these 
gifts serve as a focal point for drawing others. Authority, on the other 
hand, is not based on personal endowment. It derives its power to unite 
not from the outstanding nature of the gifts one has, but from the fact 
that a person is "invested" with a power along a different line from that 
of personal attributes. 

This "investiture" with authority takes place in different ways de- 
pending on the nature of the authority. Parental authority comes about 
from having a child. Jurisdictional authority comes from having an of- 
fice. Ecclesial authority comes from the ordination called "holy or- 
dination," that is, the sacrament of orders, where a person is drawn into 
Christ's own ordination to the Father and the Church. In whatever manner 
this "investiture" takes place, it is not the same as that which is based 
on natural endowment. 

This is seen in the fact that the power of a leader is directly 
proportioned to the attracting force of those characteristics on which 
his leadership is based. This power increases or diminishes along with 
the force of that attraction. The power of authority, on the other hand, 
is not in itself increased or diminished by the attractiveness of the one 
in authority. The source of authority remains as a certain constant within 
the variability of a person's qualities of leadership. For this reason, 
St. Ignatius warned his followers not to confuse the "personal authority," 
that is a person's qualities as leader, with the authority that comes 
from "investiture." "They should not merely consider the person of the 
one they obey, but see in him Christ our Lord, for whose sake they obey" 
(Letter on Obedience, no. 3). 

A second difference between leadership and authority, related to the 
first, comes from the fact that leadership has a certain life span . It 
emerges, reaches fruition, declines, and dies. It partakes of the tran- 
sientness of any living symbol which is based upon the force of attraction 
of gifts that share in the ebb and flow of all transient things. Today's 
leader can be tomorrow's spectator. Leadership demands a constant freshen- 
ing of the gifts which form the basis of his leadership. Otherwise 



69 



leadership loses its appeal and dies. 

Authority, on the other hand, has a certain agelessness like Melchizedek, 
His "personal authority" might increase or decrease, but his power to trans- 
mit the imperative remains as a constant, provided of course that his own 

r 

powers to judge remain unimpaired. This comes from the fact that a person 
is taken into a kind of order which is beyond that of his personal endow- 
ment. As long as he is within that order, though he himself ages, and his 
own gifts might decline, his authority remains. 

Another difference between leadership and authority is seen in the 
respective correlatives of leader and authority. The correlative of leader 
is follower , while that of authority is sub.iect . 

Today we are particularly nervous about such words as "subject," 
"inferior," "superior." We like to transpose such terms into those that 
are more congenial, which in some way horizontalize all of our relation- 
ships. We like to see all of our relationships in terms of arm-in-arm, 
and face-to-face, and side-by-side. In any kind of organization we have 
to be co-workers, co-members, cooperators, associates on an equal basis, 
partners with everyone else, where the main function of authority is service. 

Maybe some of this is an over-reaction to too much verticality in our 
lives in the past, and there is no use in rubbing salt into our sensitive 
wounds by using vocabulary which many might find abrasive. However, it 
is necessary to keep in mind, no matter what terminology we use, that by 
its very nature authority implies subjection of one's will to another, 
just as leadership implies having followers. We can no more drop the 
idea of subject when we are speaking of authority than we can drop the 
idea of follower when we are speaking of leader. 

A further difference between authority and leadership is seen in the 
different ways in which we react . Authority in a sense is always guilty 
until proven innocent, while leadership is always innocent until proven 
guilty. A person in authority seems to embody in some way the sign of 
contradiction of Christ's own authority. As one whose function is to 
transmit the imperative, and in this way to effect an ever convergent 
unity, he becomes not the symbol of unity, but the symbol of oppression 



70 



in the minds of many. He is in a way exempted from the very civilities 
which we accord to everyone else. He bears the brunt of the uncharitable- 
ness of many who claim to live by the law of love. 

The leadership of attraction does not meet with the same type of re- 
sistance. This is possibly true because such leadership does not threaten 
us as much. There is always a trapdoor which we can use to escape from 
leadership, but there is no way out when we are under someone in authority. 

For this reason those who are authority figures seem to evoke greater 
antagonism in proportion to their power to unite effectively, where au- 
thority is minimal, there is scarcely any antagonism. Where authority is 
great, as say, for example, in that of the Holy Father, the antagonsim is 
greatest. 

It is possible to explain this perhaps because of three reasons. 
First of all, the power of the demonic manifests itself greater when 
faced with greater efforts to bring about the centering of all things to 
the Father in Christ. We see this in the resistance to Christ himself. 
"We do not want this man to rule over us (Luke 19:1*0- The action of the 
Jews in preferring Barabbas, a robber, a revolutionary, and a murderer, 
is symbolic of much of the response of mankind to the authority of Christ. 
For this reason, the Church will also be resisted until the end of time. 
"If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own; but 
because you do not belong to the world, because my choice withdrew you 
from the world, therefore the world hates you. ... If they persecuted 
me, they will persecute you too" (John 1 5 :18) • To the extent that au- 
thority mediates the imperative of Christ to the world will it arouse 
resistance. 

The second reason for such antagonism toward authority is psychological . 
Fear plays a great part in the lives of all of us. We have as many causes 
to fear as there are things or persons who threaten us. The threat does 
not have to be on the level of physical punishment, but it is found on 
any level where the presence of someone or something jeopardizes my own 
existence, in what I have, or what I am, or what I shall be. 
problem with authority figures. They act as a kind of *>. :.juujo1±c college 



71 



of all the threats a person feels. The greater the authority the more can 
the person serve as the antagonistic symbol of all that arouses fear. 

For this reason a person feels more threatened by authority than he 
does by leadership. Authority implies subjection to the will of another, 
while following a wonderful leader gives a person a certain self-satisfaction 
of belonging. A follower shares in the glory of his leader. The idea of 
subjecting one f s will to another, however, does not have the same conno- 
tations . 

The third reason why authority meets with resistance comes from the 
very nature of authority which implies the transmission of the imperative 
putting an obligation on our freedom to obey. There is nothing we prize 
more than our independence. For this reason, there is nothing which 
threatens us as much as authority which claims to make our freedom a de- 
pendent freedom. It is not freedom as such that we prize so highly. It 
is the independent use of our freedom. 

For this reason we are not threatened but rather challenged by ethos . 
•pneuma . or logos . On the contrary, we are threatened by nomos . If we only 
realized, however, that we only become genuinely free to the extent that 
we become dependent, then at least the theoretical aspect of our resistance 
to legitimate authority would be solved. "Dependence" does not mean the 
substitution of what comes from another to take the place of what should 
come from myself. This would create a dependence which contradicts the 
very nature of person. An illustration might help. An artist, for example, 
depends on his inspiration to paint. It is his very dependence that sus- 
tains his creative effort. He cannot create independently of his inspi- 
ration. There is a certain parallel in the type of dependence of human 
freedom on that nomos which is not simply impersonal, but which is the 
expression of Christ's ethos , pneuma . logos . Christian freedom is mature 
to the extent that one sub jects himself to his inspiration. 

Many other differences, I am sure, could be pointed out between 
leadership and authority. Hopefully we have commented on the main ones. 
We saw that leadership depends on the attractive power coming from natural 
endowment, while authority comes from "investiture," a being taken into 



72 



a certain order which gives a person both the right and the duty to trans- 
mit the imperative that brings about convergent unity. Again, we saw that 
strength of leadership is directly proportioned to the vitality of the 
gifts on which it is based, while authority has a certain constancy which 
is independent of personal attributes. Further, the difference is seen 
in the correlatives of leadership and authority. In the one case the 
correlative is follower, and in the other, subject. This led us to in- 
quire into the phenomenon of resistance to authority, which is not found 
in a similar way in the relationship of follower to the one who leads. 
We suggested three reasons for this: firstly, the demonic discentering 
power which is antagonistic to the Christie centering power; secondly, 
the fact that authority serves as a symbol of a threatening presence, and 
takes on the image of all that one fears; and finally because authority 
by its nature demands a dependent freedom, while there is nothing we prize 
so much as our independent freedom. 

C. Problems of Leadership and Authority 

The question of the problems of leadership and authority is a topic 
that would require a paper in itself. Without claiming to exhaust the 
subject, we can at least attempt to single out some of the main problems. 
These problems can be distinguished as they touch authority or leader- 
ship in themselves, or in their relationship to each other. 

First of all, speaking of the problems of leadership, the main 
problem is to find suitable leaders. Perhaps this is so obvious an ob- 
servation that it could go unsaid. But it is an important fact. In a 
sense leaders are born, not made, though this should not be taken too 
strictly. A leader is like an artist. He is endowed with certain gi: 
which develop more or less according to his opportunities to foster them. 

It seems that in the Society we have always been blessed with leaders 
This is due in God's providence to the type of man we have attracted, and 
the kind of training given to our men. As a matter of fact it seems tha^ 
the esprit de corps of the Society comes more from the leaders it has had 
in the various fields of eduction, social reform, missionary work, and the 



73 



like, than from those who are superiors. 

At this point we should perhaps make explicit a caution which we 
hope has been assumed throughout. Our description of the distinction and 
differences between leadership and authority should not be taken to mean 
that a person in authority is some kind of a spiritual antenna transmitting 
imperatives to his subjects. Hopefully there will also be found in him in 
more or less degree the qualities of leadership we described. 

We stated above that our esprit de corps in the Society comes largely 
from the leaders with whom we have been blessed. At the same time we should 
realize that leadership can flourish only because it is one of the functions 
of authority to promote the conditions conducive to the fostering of leader- 
ship. In the Society it has been the constant insistance of authority that 
has maintained the high level of training — a level which alone can produce 
the kind of leadership that the world needs. 

Besides the problem of finding suitable leaders there is a problem 
of maintaining leadership . The leader has to remain ahead of the group 
in order to attract. He has to freshen his gifts by assimilating all that 
is valuable from his cultural milieu. It is possible that leaders today 
are like the glowworms that last only for a few hours. Perhaps one reason 
for this is the fact that they do not keep their own gifts alive by the 
work that is necessary to grow continually. 

Passing on to the problems of authority , we are sure to find agree- 
ment when we say their name is legion. It is not necessary to develop 
this point at length. First of all, there are the perennial problems. 
Authority can, for example, become impersonal and consider itself only 
as a means to keep good order so that the whole machine might run smoothly. 
It can isolate itself from the members of the community, setting itself 
apart, considering itself as something like an officer in relation to the 
enlisted men. It can adopt a certain privileged status, where it sees 
others in some way as its servants. 

These and others are perennial problems facing authority. There is, 
however, a problem which is peculiar to our own times. It is the temp- 
tation to abdicate the specific nature of authority. Many in authority 



lh 



today see their role only as advisory or exhortative. If this is literally 
true, then they are not really in a position of authority, but have reduced 
authority to what we have called leadership. The specific nature of au- 
thority as authority is to transmit the imperative that brings about unity, 
while authority may not often transmit such am imperative, it belongs to 
its very nature. To transmit an imperative, however, one does not have 
to use imperative language. It can be transmitted through requests, ad- 
vice, counsel, where, however, a person can pick up the signals that in 
this case the superior is not just acting as a co-ordinator, but as making 
his will manifest in regard to a particular mode of action. If a person 
is attuned, he can pick up the imperative in the exhortative. In a some- 
what similar fashion the meaning of Christ 1 s parables was picked up by 
those attuned to the meaning, and missed by those who were not. 

We would like finally to speak of some problems between leadership 
and authority. All of the problems touch on the complementarity of their 
relationship. In some respects it is the same problem as that described 
by the relationship between the charismatic and the institutional. It 
is not easy to harmonize ethos , pneuma . and logos , with nomos, when these 
are embodied not in one and the same person, but in different persons, as 
is normally the case. 

First of all, it is easier to get followers than it is to get sub- 
jects. Leadership appeals to our sense of expanding freedom. Authority 
connotes an ever diminishing freedom in the one obeying. For this reason, 
authority frequently finds itself on the defensive where leadership has 
become strong and is asserting its independence. In a way authority is 
at the mercy of leadership, unless of course the one in authority can 
exercise leadership on an equal or superior level to that of the competing 
leadership. 

Unless leadership shows a high degree of responsibility to authority, 
it becomes divisive. How many times we have witnessed this in the history 
of the Church, as well as in the history of religious communities. Our 
recent history is full of such examples particularly in religious con- 
gregations where a certain group with strong leadership took over, often 



75 



in opposition to authority, with the result that the community was frag- 
mented to a point where it is highly doubtful whether it can continue to 
survive for any length of time. 

Though it may sound undiplomatic in this ecumenical age, it, seems to 
me that we have a prime example of this in Martin Luther. His qualities 
of leadership were extraordinary. But they were developed and gained 
momentum by isolating themselves from the complementary role of authority. 

The mutuality of these respective roles of leadership and authority 
is not easy to work out in practice. Yet, unless authority fosters leader- 
ship, and leadership is open to authority, we have civil war, where the 
blood of brothers is spilt upon the battlefield of one's own community. 
The energies that should be directed outward to building the earth and 
the Kingdom of God are wasted on internecine strife, and we have one more 
verification of Mephistopheles 1 words in Gounod's Faust : "Et Satan conduit 
le ball!" 

II. Conclusion 

It would be interesting if we had the time and space to attempt to 
speculate on the qualities of the ideal leader and the ideal authority. 
Such a description would certainly have to see the Christie unity ef- 
fected by leadership and authority as effective to the extent that the 
leader is both drawn by Christ, and draws others to him by the trans- 
parency of his own life to the ethos , pneuma . and logos of Christ. 
Christian authority is effective to the degree that it is faithful both 
to the content of Christ's imperative and to the way that he transmitted 
this imperative, through suffering service. Christian authority is only 
fully credible if one lives according to the nomos which he transmits . 

In this age of specialization it is necessary to realize the dis- 
tinction between authority and leadership. At the same time, in this 
age of fragmentation, it is necessary more than ever to realize their 
mutual complementarity. If the Society of Jesus is to move forward, and 
bring the Kingdom of Christ closer to realization by its own leadership 
in the world, then we have to have leaders who are truly leaders in the 



76 



best sense of the term, who share their God-given gifts with us and with 
others. Our training must promote leadership, not in the sense that every 
Jesuit will be recognized as a great leader, but in the sense that we have 
to stand ahead in order to draw others to closer unity. We cannot give 
what we do not have. We cannot draw others to a level which we do not 
possess ourselves. Similarly those who have authority over us in the Lord 
have to continue to minister to us what is our right and their duty, to 
mediate to us the imperative of Christ. 

Hopefully our superiors will also possess a large degree of leader- 
ship. In any case, it is their function to foster this leadership among 
the community. What we have said can be summed up in the words of St. 
Paul: "There is a variety of gifts but always the same Spirit; there are 
all sorts of service to be done, but always to the same Lord; working in 
all sorts of different ways in different people, it is the same God who 
is working in all of them. The particular way in which the Spirit is 
given to each person is for a good purpose. ... Be ambitious for the 
higher gifts. And I am going to show you a way that is better than any 
of them" (1 Cor. 12:4-7, 3 1 ) • He goes on to describe the meaning of 
Christian love which is the source, the life force, and the goal of 
Christian leadership and authority. 

II. Comments after the Introduction, from Different Points of View 

A. By William W. Meissner, S.J., Psychiatrist 

He approached the topic from the viewpoint of his studies in psychol- 
ogy and psychiatry, and began by treating the distinction between au- 
thority and leadership. Only in the last fifteen or twenty years has 
this distinction been grasped and made truly functional by those inter- 
ested in this problem and its ramifications. 

Our thought should be about different levels. There is a strong 
tendency, especially in the Society of Jesus, to think of authority in 
terms of formal organization, our hierarchical structure as spelled out 
in the ( onstitutions. But there is also a level at which that authority 



77 



is translated into execution. One problem is that what is dictated by or 
deducible from the formal structure is completely different from what goes 
on in the order of exercising authority. Authority does not function in 

the way the formal treatises might lead one to think. 

» 

The formal approach to authority regards it as investing an individual 
with power to influence the behavior of others, in certain loci within the 
organizational structure, by reason of office. It is based on law. But 
there are many other bases on which such influence can be exerted; for 
example, power to reward, or to punish, or power of expertise of know- 
ledge. 

One of the most important bases is what is called referent power. In- 
dividuals identify with each other. They share in common goals and values; 
and this sharing gives them a common point of reference with one another, 
especially in what they are trying to do together. Here, therefore, 
leadership is set up on a different basis than authority. While authority 
remains in the appointed superior, leadership is diffused throughout the 
group; and it involves the contribution which each member makes to the 
goals of the group. It consists in the ability of each member of a group 
to contribute to its group goals. Here leadership almost becomes synony- 
mous in concept with membership. There are various ways of contributing: 
"push- influence," influence by drawing out others, and so on. 

Father Sheets f remarks brought these reflections to my mind. The 
classic treatises on leadership (of Plato, Macchiavelli, and the like) 
treat of the leader as an individual and his characteristic traits. But 
when you try to pick leaders by singling out these traits, this approach 
falls flat. Thirty or forty years ago, for example, in 19^1 when the 
military wanted to find leaders fast and train them as officers, they 
asked: How do you identify such potential leaders? They shifted from a 
trait-approach to a situation-approach: How do men act in certain sit- 
uations? The disconcerting discovery was this: In different situations, 
different men showed different capacities for leadership. Some good in 
one situation were poor in others. Hence, leadership came to be recognized 
as something exercised in and by a group. You do not have a well-functioning 



78 



group unless leadership is being exercised in it, in terms of there being 
some differentiation of function in the members. The composition and 

goals of the group elicit or facilitate certain qualities of leadership 
among certain apt members. Only when all these factors are in conjunc- 
tion does the leader emerge. 

Studies on how to pick leaders are now in unsatisfactory flux. These 
seem to be the only factors which turn up consistently: The leaders are 
intelligent, discerning and imaginative persons, convinced of and com- 
mitted to the goals of the group, and recognized by the members as being 
committed. Thus the leader becomes one whom the group selects because he 
is capable and committed. 

This raises a question for leadership in the structure of the Church 
or the Society, where the leader has traditionally been an authority 
figure, one simply appointed from outside the group. That procedure 
leaves a gap, and the question arises: will the group by its consensus 
endorse the externally appointed authority- figure as also its leader? 
Sometimes it does; but sometimes too it does not, and then he finds it 
difficult to exercise any function of true leadership. 

B. By William J. 3urke, S.J. 

He presented various ideas of modern authors on leadership and sup- 
plemented them by discriminating observations of his own. Leadership must 
be distinguished from organizational apparatus. The leader must exercise 
a prophetic role which will often involve him in a dialectic of tension 
with his community. He cannot be merely the embodiment of the group* s 
transient desires, since these may be only compensations or short-lived 
enthusiasms. His vision will at least involve the ability to foresee the 
future effects which logically will flow from present decisions. Leader- 
ship is impossible wherever those who are led have neglected or failed to 
achieve their own personal maturity. It is also impossible wherever they 
have failed to understand the mode of their membership in the group. 

Transposition, without correction, of the canons of business leader- 
ship into the area of religious leadership appears unwise. The leader may 
be the victim of the group; he must sacrifice for them in the Old Testament 



79 



sense. In a way, it seems doubtful that anyone should "follow" anyone 
else. The leader encourages and empowers each individual to confront his 
own providential destiny. 

The leader must confront and redeem the Demonic force, since his 
leadership is not solely tactical and natural. He is involved in the 
mystery of the lives and other powers in the members of the group. He 
must conciliate and mediate the qualitatively different powers of Apollo 
and Dionysus. The power of leadership is, perhaps, best given to the 
joyful man. 

Some sources used are: Aquaviva, John of Salisbury, Aristotle's 
Politics, Tamkien, Philip Slater, Theodore Roszak, Edward Alber, John 
Gardner, John Galbraith, Erik Erikson, Gandhi, and others. 

C. By Thomas E. Clarke, S.J. 

He spoke from the viewpoint of one exploring ( 1 ) the model of the 
superior suggested in the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus (espe- 
cially, for example, in [423-428, 666-667, 723-735]), and (2) modifi- 
cations of that model which are possibly desirable today. 

In the context of Ignatius 1 vision of the Society as dedicated to "the 
service of the Church through the aid of souls in companionship" (as de- 
scribed in John C. Putrell, S.J., Making an Apostolic Community of Love , page 
14 and passim), the superior, particularly the superior general, emerges as 
the one who is especially concerned for the universal good. He has both (1) 
a directive, goal-orientated role and (2) a unitive, community orientated 
role. I have the impression, possibly superficial, that in Part IX of the 
Constitutions . Ignatius 1 accent is on the directive rather than on the uni- 
tive function; or, perhaps better, that it is the strong distinction of a 
united apostolic effort which is the main focus of the Superior's concern. 

In the light of the distinction between authority and leadership, 
it should be said that leadership is dealt with throughout the Constitu - 
tions . not merely in Part IX. 

what I find missing, understandably, in Part IX of the Constitutions 
and present in contemporary thinking about the leadership which authority 



80 



can exercise, is an a'^tentiveness to the evocative character of such 
leadership. 

However, two ideas found in Part IX chime in with more modern notions 
of the exercise of authority: (1), place is made for consultation; (2), 
it is recognized for example, in the argumentation for the value of a 
lifelong term for the general that the general, to be effective, must 
possess a certain prestige ( auctoritas , [721 J). That is, there must be 
factors besides sheer juridical empowerment which invite a positive re- 
sponse to his leadership from the members. 

D. By John H. Wright, S.J. 

In 1964 a symposium was held at Alma, California, on "Leadership and 
Authority in the Modern Society of Jesus." Father Wright briefly reported 
and commented on what each of those words came to mean in that symposium: 

Leadership — is the capacity to influence others in a given situation 
toward some goal or objective. This can be realized in many different ways. 
The chief ones are: (1) the "charismatic." This is not a collection of 
unusual personal traits but a matter of (a) seeing and articulating a 
goal, (b) being and seen to be unselfishly dedicated to that goal, and 
(c) being genuinely involved with one f s followers and thus able to re- 
lease their creative powers; (2) the "administrative." This senses a 
practical way of achieving a goal on which the group is already determined; 
and (3) the "executive." This is ability to gather cooperation in working 
toward a goal. 

And -- that is, to be distinguished from, although it is often united 
with: 

Authority — the capacity to speak for the whole group. The person 
with legitimate authority may be designated in many different ways, but 
his effectiveness supposes always the consent of the group. This consent 
is not necessarily the source of his authority but is the indispensable 
condition of its effectiveness, even if the consent is grudgingly given. 
As one speaking for the whole g'roup he can bind its members to its goals 
and methods . 

l — this indicates embodiment within an institution. An idea 



81 



cannot survive effectively without institutionalization. And probably it 
can effectively survive institutionalization itself only if the members 
are more alive to the goals of the group than to group 1 s survival as a 
group . 

r 

The — this indicates a definite, actually existing body of men. 

Modern — that is, a Society continuous with our past history through 
identity of the Ignatian spirit continuously transmitted, yet a Society 
open to new goals and to new means. This develops through sincere search- 
ing, and sometimes in reaction to a depersonalized institutionalism. 

Society — that is, (1) an institutional structure or organization, 
(2) a community bound by a common spirit and goal, (and 3) a "family" 
gathered in Christ, by the Spirit, under God our Father. A superior is 
expected to function on each of these levels of the Society; but he must 
function first at the deepest level, "family." Likewise, each Jesuit 
exercises some leadership on all three levels as well. 

Of — that is, we belong not to ourselves but to Christ. 

Jesus . He is the leader through his Spirit, the model through his 
life and death, and the head through his grace. Our response of dedi- 
cation and obedience, made to leadership and authority, is his life in us. 



82 



The books available from the Institute of Jesuit Sources: 



Saint Ignatius of Loyola 

The Constitutions 

of the 

Society of Jesus 

Translated, with an Introduction 
and a Commentary, by 



Pages xii + 420 



George E. Ganss, S.J. 

Cloth, $14.50 
Paperback, $3.50 

The first English translation of the 
entire corpus of St. Ignatius' Con- 
stitutions, which are a classic of 
spiritual doctrine and of the law of 
religious institutes. 



Making an 

Apostolic Community 
of Love 

The Role of the Superior 

according to 

St. Ignatius of Loyola 



JOHN CARROLL FUTRELL, S.J. 



Cloth, $8.50 
Paperback, $3.00 



Pages vii -I- 232 



The theory and practice of spiritual 
discernment, especially for community 
decisions. 



A Modern Scriptural 
Approach to the 
Spiritual Exercises 

DAVID M. STANLEY, S.J. 

Originally given as a retreat to Jesuit 
scholastics, this work 

explains what the modern approach in 
scriptural study is 

is a concrete example of its use in 
making or directing a retreat 

presents up-to-date scriptural and doc- 
trinal foundations for prayer 



Pages xvi + 358 



Cloth, $7.50 
Paperback, $3.50 
"... the spirituality flows immediate- 
ly and smoothly from the biblical 
interpretation. This is genuine biblical 
spirituality ..." 

Current Scripture Notes 



The Jesuits: Their 
Spiritual Doctrine 
and Practice 

A historical study by 

JOSEPH DE CUIBERT, S.J. 

W. J. Young, S.J., Translator 

PART I: St. Ignatius, 1491-1556, his 
personal interior life 

PART II: Developing the spiritual 
heritage 

PART III: Some general aspects 
Extensive Bibliography and Index 



Cloth, $14.00 



Pages xxv + 692 



The most comprehensive and scholar- 
ly work available on the topic 

Expounds St. Ignatius' spirituality of 
apostolic activity 



83 



These pages 82 and Sj> give 
a check list of all the books 
at present available from the 
Institute of Jesuit Sources. 

This Institute, which pub- 
lishes books, is distinct from 
the American Assistancy Seminar 
on Jesuit Spirituality, which 
publishes the series of bro- 
chures, Studies in the Spiritu- 
ality of Jesuits . However, both 
organizations have many purposes 
in common. Hence many readers 
of these Studies will probably 
find it useful to have the list 
presented here. 



ORDER FORM 

The Institute of Jesuit Sources 
Fusz Memorial, St. Louis University 
3700 West Pine Blvd. 
St. Louis, Missouri 63108 

Gentlemen: 

Please send me the following books: 



copies of St. Ignatius: Constitutions. 
Trans, Intro., Commentary, by G. E. 
Ganss, S.J., at list price 



Totals at 
list prices 



cloth bound, at $14.50 each _ 
paperback, at $3.50 each _. 



copies of Making an Apostolic Com- 
munity of Love: The role of the Su- 
perior according to St. Ignatius, by 
John Carroll Futrell, S.J., list price 

cloth bound, at $8.50 each 

paperback, at $3.00 each 

copies of A Modern Scriptural Ap- 
proach to the Spiritual Exercises, 
D. M. Stanley, S.J at list price 

cloth bound, at $7.50 each 

paperback, at $3.50 each 

copies of The Jesuits: Their Spiritual 
Doctrine and Practice, De Guibert- 
Young, cloth bound, at $14.00 list price 



Total at list prices 

Policy on DISCOUNTS, to educators, libraries, 

schools, others 

On orders $15 or more: 10% 

On orders $25 or more: 20% 

Total if there is a discount 



NAME 



ADDRESS 



CITY AND STATE ZIP CODE 



FORTHCOMING BOOK 

about Easter, 1972 

A History 
of the Society of Jesus 

William V. Bangert, S.J. 



8k 



THE TITLES SO FAR PUBLISHED IN THIS SERIES 

These Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits are presently published 
at irregular intervals, usually three or more a year; but the volumes are 
numbered according to the years. Thus, those published in 1969 make up 
Volume I, those in 1970 Volume II, and those in 1971 Volume III. 

The Numbers Published So Far Are These: 

Vol. I, no. 1 (September, 1969). John R. Sheets, S.J. A Profile of the 
Contemporary Jesuit: His Challenges and Opportunities 

no. 2 (November, 1969). George E. Ganss, S.J. The Authentic 

Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius: Some Facts of History 
and Terminology Basic to Their Functional Efficacy Today. 

Vol. II, no. 1 (February, 1970) . William J. Burke, S.J. Institution and 
Person. 

II, no. 2 (April, 1970). John Carroll Futrell, S.J. Ignatian 
Discernment. 

II, no. 3 (September, 1970). Bernard J. F. Lonergan, S.J. The 

Response of the Jesuit, as Priest and Aposxle, in the 
Modern World. 

Vol. Ill, no. 1 (February, 1971). John H. Wright, S.J. The Grace of Our 
Founder and the Grace of Our Vocation. 

III, no. 2 (April, 1971). Vincent J. O'Flaherty, S.J. Some Reflec- 

tions on the Jesuit Commitment. 

Ill, no. 3 (June, 1971). Thomas E. Clarke, S.J. Jesuit Commitment — 
Fraternal Covenant? John C. Haughey, S.J. A New Perspec- 
tive on Religious Commitment. 

Ill, no. 4 (September, 1971). Jules J. Toner, S.J. A Method for 
Communal Discernment of God's Will. 

III, no. 5 (November, 1971). John R. Sheets, S.J. Toward a Theology 

of the Religious Life. A Sketch, with Particular Reference 
to the Society of Jesus. 

Vol. IV, no. 1 (January, 1972). David B. Knight, S.J. Saint Ignatius' 
Ideal of Poverty 

IV, no. 2 (March, 1972). Two Discussions: (1) Spiritual Direction. 

(2) Leadership and Authority. 




THE AMERICAN ASSISTANCY SEMINAR 
ON JESUIT SPIRITUALITY 



PRICES and SUBSCRIPTIONS 

STUDIES IN THE SPIRITUALITY OF JESUITS , as the masthead inside the 
front cover explains in greater detail, is published by this Seminar. 
Prom the nature of the case these studies are focused on Jesuit problems 
and interests. But others who find these essays interesting or helpful 
are cordially welcome to read them. 

Presently the PRICE is 25 cents per copy, plus the mailing costs. 

SUBSRIPTIONS will be accepted for the issues of one academic year. 
The number of issues each year cannot be stated definitely now, but prob- 
ably it will be five. These subscriptions must run from each November 
through the following October, because changes in our mailing list can 
be made only once a year. Subscriptions received here after June 1 , 1971 1 
must be paid in advance, at $1.65 inside. the United States, and $1.85 
outside. 

TO THOSE WHO DESIRE TO SUBSCRIBE : 
It will greatly facilitate our office work if you use the form below. 
--------------- Cut off here ---------------- 



The Secretary of the Assistancy Seminar 

Pusz Memorial 

3700 West Pine Blvd. 

St. Louis, Missouri 6^1 08 



Dear Father: 

For the enclosed $ , please add the following name to 

your list of subscribers: 



PRINT your name here 



Address 



Zip code 



The American Assistancy Seminar 

Fusz Memorial, St. Louis University 

3700 West Pine Blvd. 

St. Louis, Missouri 63108 



Non-Profit Organization 
U. S. POSTAGE 

PAID 

St. Louis, Mo. 
Permit No. 134